NOM

Not Buying It wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 28, 2020 2:52 pm

Kind of pisses me off. Rather than confront these issues directly in General Conference or the dozens of talks they give each year, they instead try to demonize us and de-legitimize our issues. Freakin’ cowards.

“1smartdodog” wrote: If member retention affected them personally, more than just mild concern they would act differently. Suppose they lost income as numbers fell, what would they do differently. Or what if they had the chance of getting replaced? As it is there is no mechanism in place that promotes much more than the status quo.

1smartdodog wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 29, 2020 8:34 am

Not Buying It wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 28, 2020 2:52 pm

Kind of pisses me off. Rather than confront these issues directly in General Conference or the dozens of talks they give each year, they instead try to demonize us and de-legitimize our issues. Freakin’ cowards.

Most large corporations suffer from the same thing. Those in charge never get into the weeds and try to understand the issues of the worker bees. They are insulated from the chatter of the masses. The farther you are rremoved from the consequences of your decisions the easier it is for you to ignore them.

If member retention affected them personally, more than just mild concern they would act differently. Suppose they lost income as numbers fell, what would they do differently. Or what if they had the chance of getting replaced? As it is there is no mechanism in place that promotes much more than the status quo.

Reuben wrote: ↑

Sun Mar 01, 2020 3:41 am

I think they really believe the bullsh*t they say in order to stay in power. I think they're actually motivated partly by keeping the members' fragile testimonies burning bright.

I think all the stuff alas said is true, too. I'll bet most of them don't know they're also motivated by keeping their families and lifestyles secure.

When a bully is pounding your face in to "humble you" or an abuser takes absolute control of your life because "you're too stupid to do it right," they're not lying. They're stating a belief they accept partly because it's convenient for them: it gets them something they want.

RubinHighlander wrote: ↑

Mon Mar 02, 2020 12:11 pm

I sent a copy of this report to my former bishop. It was in response to a couple of "ministers" (former ward members) coming by the house one day. At first we talked about the weather, then I congratulated them on 2 hour church. One of them asked if I was ready to come back, to which I replied that zero hour church works the best for us. Then one of them made the mistake to use the most common assumption there is among TBMs: "Well, sometimes some people get offended." I immediately shut him down and told him that's the most overused and inaccurate statement there is in the church. I then told them about the Faith Crisis Report and gave them a few examples of the top reasons people leave.

Needless to say, they've never been back. It prompted me to send a copy of the report to my former bishop, that the information in that report is so important. I pointed out that when the report was given to Dieter, it wasn't long after he gave his infamous "Doubt our Doubts" talk in conference; wherein he also apologized for the mistakes of past leaders and told members that the reasons people leave are more complicated that we assume. I also told that bishop that if he wants ministers to go and visit former members or inactives, he should understand the misconceptions active members have about those inactives and go on the visit more prepared. I never heard back from him.

alas wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 29, 2020 9:57 am

1smartdodog wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 29, 2020 8:34 am

Not Buying It wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 28, 2020 2:52 pm

Kind of pisses me off. Rather than confront these issues directly in General Conference or the dozens of talks they give each year, they instead try to demonize us and de-legitimize our issues. Freakin’ cowards.

Most large corporations suffer from the same thing. Those in charge never get into the weeds and try to understand the issues of the worker bees. They are insulated from the chatter of the masses. The farther you are rremoved from the consequences of your decisions the easier it is for you to ignore them.

If member retention affected them personally, more than just mild concern they would act differently. Suppose they lost income as numbers fell, what would they do differently. Or what if they had the chance of getting replaced? As it is there is no mechanism in place that promotes much more than the status quo.

That was my thought. What incentive do they have to come clean? With 100 billion in the bank, another 100 billion or more in land holdings, and who know what other wealth stashed away, the corporation will be around for generations, no matter what happens with the membership. So, they are set for life, and they can pass the wealth on to their children who pretend to believe who can pass it on to their children. And eventually there will be no need to pretend to even be a religion any more. It will just be several very wealthy families who keep the corporation in their families. As disgusting as it is to use people to get rich off of by telling them they have to pay into your wealthy corporation before feeding their kids, that is what it has become. It is priest craft at its finest. Getting rich in the name of God. It all started with the idea that Joseph had to make money off of his peep stone, and since real treasure was hard to find, fake religion would do. I console myself with the idea about how much their own book condemns what they are doing, and that they are the great and abominable.

alas wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 29, 2020 9:57 am

What incentive do they have to come clean?

alas wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 29, 2020 9:57 am

1smartdodog wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 29, 2020 8:34 am

Not Buying It wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 28, 2020 2:52 pm

Kind of pisses me off. Rather than confront these issues directly in General Conference or the dozens of talks they give each year, they instead try to demonize us and de-legitimize our issues. Freakin’ cowards.

Most large corporations suffer from the same thing. Those in charge never get into the weeds and try to understand the issues of the worker bees. They are insulated from the chatter of the masses. The farther you are rremoved from the consequences of your decisions the easier it is for you to ignore them.

If member retention affected them personally, more than just mild concern they would act differently. Suppose they lost income as numbers fell, what would they do differently. Or what if they had the chance of getting replaced? As it is there is no mechanism in place that promotes much more than the status quo.

That was my thought. What incentive do they have to come clean? With 100 billion in the bank, another 100 billion or more in land holdings, and who know what other wealth stashed away, the corporation will be around for generations, no matter what happens with the membership. So, they are set for life, and they can pass the wealth on to their children who pretend to believe who can pass it on to their children. And eventually there will be no need to pretend to even be a religion any more. It will just be several very wealthy families who keep the corporation in their families. As disgusting as it is to use people to get rich off of by telling them they have to pay into your wealthy corporation before feeding their kids, that is what it has become. It is priest craft at its finest. Getting rich in the name of God. It all started with the idea that Joseph had to make money off of his peep stone, and since real treasure was hard to find, fake religion would do. I console myself with the idea about how much their own book condemns what they are doing, and that they are the great and abominable.

Not Buying It wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 28, 2020 2:52 pm

Kind of pisses me off. Rather than confront these issues directly in General Conference or the dozens of talks they give each year, they instead try to demonize us and de-legitimize our issues. Freakin’ cowards.

RubinHighlander wrote: ↑

Mon Mar 02, 2020 12:11 pm

It prompted me to send a copy of the report to my former bishop, that the information in that report is so important. I pointed out that when the report was given to Dieter, it wasn't long after he gave his infamous "Doubt our Doubts" talk in conference; wherein he also apologized for the mistakes of past leaders and told members that the reasons people leave are more complicated that we assume. I also told that bishop that if he wants ministers to go and visit former members or inactives, he should understand the misconceptions active members have about those inactives and go on the visit more prepared. I never heard back from him.

Hagoth wrote: ↑

Tue Mar 03, 2020 11:28 am

RubinHighlander wrote: ↑

Mon Mar 02, 2020 12:11 pm

It prompted me to send a copy of the report to my former bishop, that the information in that report is so important. I pointed out that when the report was given to Dieter, it wasn't long after he gave his infamous "Doubt our Doubts" talk in conference; wherein he also apologized for the mistakes of past leaders and told members that the reasons people leave are more complicated that we assume. I also told that bishop that if he wants ministers to go and visit former members or inactives, he should understand the misconceptions active members have about those inactives and go on the visit more prepared. I never heard back from him.

And he got back to you a week later with his dog-eared and highlighted copy of the report, eager to get your feedback as someone who has seen the situations from both sides and asking how he can help others like you feel more loved and understood, right?

Corsair wrote: ↑

Tue Mar 03, 2020 9:07 am

Not Buying It wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 28, 2020 2:52 pm

Kind of pisses me off. Rather than confront these issues directly in General Conference or the dozens of talks they give each year, they instead try to demonize us and de-legitimize our issues. Freakin’ cowards.

After reading that report, I gained respect for Uchtdorf then gradually lost that respect as his focus in conference talks did not seem to change. As far as I can tell, his response was to present the idea of "grace" a bit more in his talks. This is a nice change, but the most vocal believers in my life continue to prioritize obedience.

Like many of you, I'm in a mixed-faith marriage. I have prayed for some apostle to address this in a general conference talk. Occasionally, the Ensign has a decent article. But those lack the gravitas of having Uchtodorf or Nelson address this topic directly and publicly.

It is unfortunate that some have stumbled because of mistakes made by men. But in spite of this, the eternal truth of the restored gospel found in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is not tarnished, diminished, or destroyed.

As an Apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ and as one who has seen firsthand the councils and workings of this Church, I bear solemn witness that no decision of significance affecting this Church or its members is ever made without earnestly seeking the inspiration, guidance, and approbation of our Eternal Father. This is the Church of Jesus Christ. God will not allow His Church to drift from its appointed course or fail to fulfill its divine destiny.

Not Buying It wrote: ↑

Wed Mar 04, 2020 6:27 am

President Uchtdorf made a halfhearted attempt to show some understanding of those who leave the Church, but in the end supported the institution that supports him. And “Doubt your doubts” became the greatest inoculation slogan of all time.

And notice how he didn’t specify what any of the mistakes were, or address any of the specifics of things that cause members to doubt? I don’t feel like patting him on the back for an effort that falls so short of what is needed.

RubinHighlander wrote: ↑

Wed Mar 04, 2020 9:09 am

Not Buying It wrote: ↑

Wed Mar 04, 2020 6:27 am

President Uchtdorf made a halfhearted attempt to show some understanding of those who leave the Church, but in the end supported the institution that supports him. And “Doubt your doubts” became the greatest inoculation slogan of all time.

And notice how he didn’t specify what any of the mistakes were, or address any of the specifics of things that cause members to doubt? I don’t feel like patting him on the back for an effort that falls so short of what is needed.

I agree that any praise for Dieter is not well deserved, he was definitely trying to have it both ways. It seemed to me he's the best the church has as far as any hope of admission or acknowledgement of the issues. And what did it get him for saying anything about it? He was forced to step down and take a backseat to the older more conservative Coblers. Part of of kicking Dieter out of the presidency was probably Russel's concern that he would be overshadowed by Dieter's popularity and RMN wasn't having any of that.